There's never been a unicellular lifeform; multiple life forms evolved simultaneously

[Another Ben]

This is an attempt to formalize a thread that got out of control in the general evolution/creation forum before ('transition from single to many celled critter' or words to that effect).

Just thought I'd post this now to give people time to think about it - I'll be posting on the forum again on the date below, unless I get snowed under with other commitments in which case I'll close this thread/ let somebody else take my position if they think it's worth advocating.

1) The topic of the debate.

As above, versus the antithesis (obviously)

2) The participants of the debate, and what positions they will argue.

It would be useful if I had a biological an expert in my corner, so if anybody thinks it's a stance worth defending, then perhaps we could have a two on two debate - is that allowed? - I'll supply the more airy-fairy ideas based stuff on the 'for' side. Having said that, it hasn't been difficult digging up a few academic papers to support my argument, so I won't insist on it.

3) The scope of the debate.
4) The length of the debate, in number of rounds.
5) Whether statements will be made concurrently or in turns, and if the latter, who goes first.
6) The maximum length of each statement.
7) The maximum duration between statements.
8) The extent to which quotes and references from outside sources will be allowed.
9) The starting date of the debate.

Sometime after September 23

10) Any additional rules or a debate format that debate participants must observe.

Any suggestions willingly accepted, but don't be surprised if I don't reply till the end of september. Thanks.

[Dean Anderson]

Erm.. surely the proposition that 'There has never been a unicellular lifeform' is refuted by simply looking down a microsope at some Paramecia or Amoebae...?

I think you need to rethink your title for the debate if you want people to give it serious consideration.

[Duke Leto]

I think he was going for no first ancestor cell.

[Another Ben]

Erm.. surely the proposition that 'There has never been a unicellular lifeform' is refuted by simply looking down a microsope at some Paramecia or Amoebae...?

Aha, well yes, that's why you've got to debate with me and find out!

Look on the main e/c forum for details ('more formal leave...etc' for the less emotional version of things...).

Brief summary, and I don't want to give my argument away totally:

I'm questioning the meaning of lifeform ; it implies something which could exist independently (questions of form v system etc arise, but I promise I won't get too bogged down in semantics if I can help it), and I assert that unicellular lifeforms could never have evolved (or exist for a significant amount of time - yes, I know, first quibble, it's not good; but I don't have my debating hat on yet :Cheeky: ) as such.

There are of course various avenues to debate, and I expect to be refuted in some of them, (if there's any interest expressed in the debate at all) but that's not a reason for not having the debate. Anyway, I'm off tomorrow, so bye for now.